Simon Pieters wrote on 03/19/2008 08:22:42 AM:
>
> On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 13:06:52 +0100, Sam Ruby <rubys@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> >> I agree that nothing should prevent you from using correct SVG
fragments
> >
> >> inline in html.
> >
> > Agree in principle, but "nothing" is too strong. Requiring HTML to
> > support
> > "<!ENTITY>" may not be necessary or appropriate.
> >
> > Example:
> > http://upload.wikimedia.
> org/wikipedia/en/9/91/Adobe_Creative_Suite_2_logo.svg
>
> That one would, AFAICT, work fine under Henri's proposal where namespace
> declarations are ignored and the "xlink:" prefix is hardcoded. (Although
> if you copy-pasted the whole shebang into text/html you would get the
> characters "]>" displayed before the SVG since the doctype ends at the
> first ">".)
OK, then I will simply point to correct SVG fragments that conform to the
"-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1 plus MathML 2.0 plus SVG 1.1//EN" DTD:
http://golem.ph.utexas.edu/~distler/blog/archives/001475.html
Note the use of prefixes. A use that is mandated by the DTD.
Let me be clear: I do not like the proposal to ignore namespaces.
Particularly given that it seems likely that MS will be promoting their use
and supporting them after a fashion. I believe that attributes which
happen to be named "xmlns" on unrecognized HTML elements triggering a new
HTML5 parsing mode is a much more promising avenue to explore.
But I believe that requiring that "nothing" change is too strong (And to be
fair, I don't think that's what Erik fully intended). And I believe that
we have plenty of use cases at this point. Ones that involve nested
namespaces and namespaced attributes and unknown namespaces. What I
personally think would be most helpful at this point is prototypes. A
special build of Opera or WebKit or Firefox that people like Jacques,
Shelley, Jeff, or myself could try to break.
And if Jacques has to drop his use of prefixes (or equivalently, if I had
to start adding them to my usages), that might be entirely OK.
- Sam Ruby